Re: [Ntp] Local time in NTPv5?

Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com> Mon, 01 August 2022 08:01 UTC

Return-Path: <mlichvar@redhat.com>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59323C15C500 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 01:01:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.691
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.691 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.582, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S4s0f6riAE7L for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 01:01:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6C2FC15949B for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 01:01:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1659340880; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9yPUIco+SyZBD3R9PagDGdMukVoo6GX0Gz5AqN9vrM0=; b=SmsXO6SWYtAXT5o5ULkuEZbhzQ7IW7/JPHFpFRlLXPAF44e3TAe1ixPlkZRVqlc1SSVL1j 24G7BfbcvBoFKQVOvozs5ilCP7FCFL5u3IKsHHFmhNHrUFwQh5N/srhz9Nlhxg8SkfuGjm gCkWgUdUEshxz+9QcJzlj3veAHG+leM=
Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-657-gPHsf0bqMnqmd5_v2fmOrg-1; Mon, 01 Aug 2022 04:01:17 -0400
X-MC-Unique: gPHsf0bqMnqmd5_v2fmOrg-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C86A9185A794; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 08:01:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (unknown [10.43.135.229]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C619403163; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 08:01:16 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2022 10:01:13 +0200
From: Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>
To: Danny Mayer <mayer@pdmconsulting.net>
Cc: ntp@ietf.org
Message-ID: <YueISWEyyDX4u2Ly@localhost>
References: <YuFTPU4kvL+4teZO@localhost> <a5e8e165-08ed-596e-76b6-072573977e94@pdmconsulting.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a5e8e165-08ed-596e-76b6-072573977e94@pdmconsulting.net>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.10
Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=mlichvar@redhat.com
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/hU5eufP5QCLbjZIO0I9KmxOvp3M>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] Local time in NTPv5?
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network Time Protocol <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2022 08:01:27 -0000

On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 10:56:07PM -0400, Danny Mayer wrote:
> This makes no sense at all. NTP only knows about UTC. All major operating
> systems store timestamps in UTC. Time-zones are just a display issue.

This is about very simple devices like a large digital clock that you
mount on a wall in an office or warehouse, plug it to the network with
PoE, and expect it to display local time. It may not have any
operating system, or any services accessible from the network. Just a
simple firmware with a DHCP and NTP client.

The NTP server is provided in the option 42 (or 56 for IPv6). This is
well known and widely used.

For the timezone it seems there are three options. The old option 2
(time offset) and more recent options 100 (TZ POSIX string) and 101
(TZ name) from RFC4833. Option 2 provides only the current offset, so
this wouldn't work well with DST changes. The option 101 requires the
client to have an up-to-date TZ database, but the option 100 provides
the current timezone itself as a string, including DST. This should
work well in this use case.

I guess those devices I heard people complaining about didn't support
this option, or maybe they didn't have it documented. It could be an
awareness issue. I didn't know it existed before starting this thread.

If there is no good use case for local time without DHCP, I agree that
it would be better to leave it out of NTPv5.

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar